MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389322582 · doi:10.1111/add.16401

Health‐care resource use among patients who use illicit opioids in England, 2010–20: A descriptive matched cohort study

2023· article· en· W4389322582 on OpenAlexafffund
N. van Hest, Thomas D. Brothers, Andrea Williamson, Dan Lewer

Bibliographic record

VenueAddiction · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOpioid Use Disorder Treatment
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersNational Institute on Drug AbuseNational Institutes of HealthNational Institute for Health and Care ResearchCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchDalhousie UniversityDepartment of Health and Social Care
KeywordsMedicineEmergency medicinePoisson regressionConfidence intervalPopulationEmergency departmentRate ratioHealth careCohort studyFamily medicinePsychiatryEnvironmental healthInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: People who use illicit opioids have higher mortality and morbidity than the general population. Limited quantitative research has investigated how this population engages with health-care, particularly regarding planned and primary care. We aimed to measure health-care use among patients with a history of illicit opioid use in England across five settings: general practice (GP), hospital outpatient care, emergency departments, emergency hospital admissions and elective hospital admissions. DESIGN: This was a matched cohort study using Clinical Practice Research Datalink and Hospital Episode Statistics. SETTING: Primary and secondary care practices in England took part in the study. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 57 421 patients with a history of illicit opioid use were identified by GPs between 2010 and 2020, and 172 263 patients with no recorded history of illicit opioid use matched by age, sex and practice. MEASUREMENTS: We estimated the rate (events per unit of time) of attendance and used quasi-Poisson regression (unadjusted and adjusted) to estimate rate ratios between groups. We also compared rates of planned and unplanned hospital admissions for diagnoses and calculated excess admissions and rate ratios between groups. FINDINGS: A history of using illicit opioids was associated with higher rates of health-care use in all settings. Rate ratios for those with a history of using illicit opioids relative to those without were 2.38 [95% confidence interval (CI) = 2.36-2.41] for GP; 1.99 (95% CI = 1.94-2.03) for hospital outpatient visits; 2.80 (95% CI = 2.73-2.87) for emergency department visits; 4.98 (95% CI = 4.82-5.14) for emergency hospital admissions; and 1.76 (95% CI = 1.60-1.94) for elective hospital admissions. For emergency hospital admissions, diagnoses with the most excess admissions were drug-related and respiratory conditions, and those with the highest rate ratios were personality and behaviour (25.5, 95% CI = 23.5-27.6), drug-related (21.2, 95% CI = 20.1-21.6) and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (19.4, 95% CI = 18.7-20.2). CONCLUSIONS: Patients who use illicit opioids in England appear to access health services more often than people of the same age and sex who do not use illicit opioids among a wide range of health-care settings. The difference is especially large for emergency care, which probably reflects both episodic illness and decompensation of long-term conditions.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.019
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.247 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations7
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAddictionSame topicOpioid Use Disorder TreatmentFrench-language works237,207